Re: [RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Adrian Bunk
Date: Friday, August 3, 2007 - 6:30 am

On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:05:53PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:

None of this should be in any way user selectable.

We are currently having problems although distributions ship with
4k stacks. Any option offering less than the default distributions 
ship with, in the worst case hidden under EMBEEDED, could be called
CONFIG_NONWORKING_KERNEL since it will be an untested configuration that 
will no longer be working after some time.


Even with the current stack usage in the kernel the threshold value must 
be at a value that you can't do this with only 4 kB of initial stack 
since you'd have to use extra stack when you have 3 kB left.

Why?

Consider that the highest stack usage of a single function of a network 
device driver (sic) is currently over 2 kB. [1]

And since relaxed stack usage rules will result in driver authors 
becoming more sloppy, only 3 kB of free stack won't always be enough...

cu
Adrian

[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/13/87

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows, Keith Owens, (Thu Aug 2, 9:05 pm)
Re: [RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows, Eric W. Biederman, (Fri Aug 3, 5:36 am)
Re: [RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows, Adrian Bunk, (Fri Aug 3, 6:30 am)
Re: [RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows , Keith Owens, (Sat Aug 4, 7:25 pm)
Re: [RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows, Eric W. Biederman, (Sat Aug 4, 8:42 pm)